Psych 111 terms (Test 4)

Social Comparison Theory

• Upwards

• Downwards

Evaluating our abilities or beliefs or understanding of ourselves to other people

• _____: comparing yourself to someone better than you

  • Makes you feel bad about ourselves but encourages us

• _____: comparing yourself to someone who is worse than you

  • Make us feel good about ourselves but does not encourage us to get better

• Ex: bronze winners tend to feel better then silver winners

Enlightenment Effect

where we learn about some sort of theory or concept, by learning about it, it changes our real world behavior

Halo Effect

 when one person had one positive trait, we assume they have many positive traits

Self fulfilling prophecy

When we believe that something will happen, we change our behavior to make it more likely that that thing will happen

Chameleon Effect

unconsciously mimicking those around us 

• Reason: want to be accepted not rejected

• increase likely hood of social acceptance

Components:

• Affective

• Behavioral

• Cognitive

what makes up an attitude:

• _____: Emotional reaction to stimulant

• _____:  inclination to respond to stimulus

  • How we would like to respond to a stimulant

• _____: what comes to mind because of the presentation/stimulant

  • What elements do you think about

Affective, Behavioral, Cognitive

What are the three components to attitude?

• Strength

• Accessibility

• Ambivalence

Dimensions of Attitude:

• _____: How likely an attitude is likely to change 

  • stronger an attitude, the less likely it is to change

  • How ingrained it is in our life

  • How long we have the attitude

• _____: Attitude that comes to mind first is the most accessible/convineint

• _____: positive and negative feelings towards one object

  • Ex: chocolate pie tastes good but not very healthy

Strenght, Accessibility, Ambivalence

What are three dimensions of attitude?

• Source

• Receiver

• Message

• Channel

Attitude change components:

_____: who is trying to change the attitude

_____: the attitude of the person who the source is trying to change

_____: what a source shows you to attempt to change your attitude

_____: the way they are giving the message to the receiver

Cognitive Dissonance

When we have either two ideas or two thoughts (or a thought and a behavior) that are opposite/in conflict with each other that makes us uncomfortable, we often try to compensate or gaslight ourselves to not make the ideas dissent in our perception

• Come to lab to do a mind-numbingly boring task

• When done, they tell you to tell the next person the study is a lot of fun and if you do = you get money

• After they lie to the next person, they are asked how much they enjoyed the experiment

• Expectation:

  • Person who got 20 dollars would enjoy more than those with 1 dollar

• Reality:

  • the people who got paid the most money recorded lowest enjoyment

• Explanation:

  • What’s happening is that the participants feel bad for lying; generally, we don’t like liars, and it makes us feel bad about ourselves

  • The people who got paid $20 had justification to lie (anyone would) 

  • The people who got paid $1 don’t have that justification → they have to deal with the fact that they lied to someone. They can’t change the behavior they did, so they change their opinion on the task

  • If they genuinely believe that the experiment was fun, they can “get away” with lying (gaslighting themselves)

What happened in the cognitive dissonance psychological study?

• expectation vs. reality?

• reasoning

Self-Perception Theory

we don’t actually know that much about our attitudes or what we think; instead, we learn what our attitudes are by observing our behavior

• We change our attitude on something based on our perception of our behavior

• We want to reflect our thoughts based on our actions

Impression Management Theory

 Different attitudes are appropriate based on the impression we are trying to give off

Elaboration likelihood Model

• Central path

• Peripheral path

 two paths to attitude change

• _____:  focused on the message; you think you have a good argument to cause change in another individual

  • Political ads

  • Attitude change lasts longer

• _____: because we don’t have sufficient reason to make someone have an attitude change, instead you create an illusion/distractions to create potential change of attitude in an individual

  • Ex: sweet cereal brand

  • More temporary change

Foot in the door

 Starting small and getting bigger and bigger in requests until you get to your goal request

• Ex: salesman trying to sell you something at your door

  • You’ll say no but you’ll say yes to letting them sit, get water = eventually you say yes to big request

Door in the Face

Huge request that you don’t expect anyone to say yes to as first

• You then follow with a smaller/another request and because they said no at first, they feel bad for saying no so they’re more likely to say yes to the 2nd request

  • Emotional manipulation

Attributions

why the way the things happen and why people do things

Stable vs. Unstable

Part of Attribution:

• _____: explanation is unlikely to change

• _____: explanation is likely to change

Internal vs external

Part of Attribution:

• _____: Something about the person who the behavior you’re trying to change led to that behavior

• _____: Something outside that person that led to that behavior

Individualism culture vs. collectivism culture

• _____: Cares more about the individual person

  • More likely internal attribution

  • More western culture

• _____: Care more about the larger group of people in a culture

  • More likely external attribution

  • More eastern culture

Fundamental Attribution Error

For other people, we are more likely to assume and make internal attribution

Defensive Attribution Error

When something bad happens to us, we are more likely to make external attribution

• We don’t like to think we cause our own misfortunes

• More likely to think internal when something good happens to us

Prejudice

emotional reaction to an outgroup member

Discrimination

behavioral reaction to an outgroup member

Stereotypes

cognitional reaction to an outgroup members

• Schemas

Subtyping

 an exception to a stereotype that still allows us to maintain that stereotype

Perceptual Confirmation

we see what we expect to see and ignore/don’t process info that doesn’t fit with our expectations

Illusory correlation

we believe we encounter more instances of confirmation than we actually have

Adaptive Conservatism

prejudice occurs because it’s better to be safe than sorry

•  (from an evolutionary perspective)

Out-group Homogeneity

• variability hypothesis

•  member of an out-group are more similar to each other than the members of our ingroup are

  • Because you have little experience with outgroup members, it is easier to generalize

• _____:  belief in early 1900s, more variance in men than there is women in a group

  • Reasoning: bias since the men who made this experiment are men

    • Sexism, no actual evidence to support this

• contact hypothesis

• superordinate goals

2 ways to decrease discrimination and prejudice

Contact Hypothesis

 if you can increase contact with outgroup members, it tends to decrease prejudice stereotypes and discrimination

Superordinate goals

shared goals that require cooperation between outgroup members in order to succeed

Common knowledge effect

you are more likely to discuss information that you know all group members share

• Good for not leaving someone out, but not gaining new knowledge

• Approval motivation 

Social Loafing

one person works less hard because they assume other people will cover for them

Group polarization

Group makes more extreme decision than an individual might have

Groupthink

Everyone just agrees and adding on in the same way without adding anything new or unique to the group

• Stuck in a cyclical thought pattern

Deindividuation

 where your individual identity matters less than group identity

• A lot more likely to engage in bad behavior 

  • Reason: anonymity makes you want to follow groups more

Conformity

Going along with group without direct request

Compliance

• obedience

_____: going along with direct request

• _____: authority figure making a direct request

Line study

• conformity

• Group of people get pictures of a standard line and 3 other lines: which one is the same

• Even if majority in a group gave the wrong answer, they will still say it to not deviate

• What does it demonstrate?

Informational Influence

Going along with the group because you genuinely they must be right and I must be wrong

Normative Influence

You follow group not because you think they are right, but you go along with the group to avoid any social ramifications

Unanimity

 there is a lot more pressure if 100% of the other people in the group say the same thing to also say the same thing

Co-conspirator

someone else who is willing to go against the group, big drop in conformity

• It's not that the ____ is going with you, but just against the group

• Much more space for other people to go against group

• changes your perception of that person

Group size

 the bigger the amount of people in a group, the more pressure there is to conform

Will affect informational influence but not normative influence

• No social ramifications for picking against it if you genuinely believe you are right

How does anonymity affect informational influence and normative influence?

• why?

Milgram Experiment of Obedience

What experiment had people getting shocked if they got the answer wrong?

• Participants: men from new haven → debate whether it would be the same responses if it was women as participants

  • Eventually experiment done with women and same results

• Study: shock person 2 if person 1 got a wrong answer

  • People would continue until the top voltage

  • ⅓ amount of people stopped but had to say it 4x

• Willingness of ordinary person to obey authority figure even if it conflicts pain on others

What Happened in the Milgram Experiment of Obedience?

• what did it demonstrate?

Confederates

trained actor that acts as another participant but in reality are working with the experimenters

Closeness

More pressure as proximity of the person with authority increases relative to you 

•  more willingness to comply

Temporal Closeness

 If task is set for future, obedience tends to drop

• If task is set for current time, obedience is higher

Legitimate Authority

• Signifiers of authority that lead participant to believe in expertise 

  • Ex: in Milgram Experiment, experimenters had white lab coats, from Yale

    • Much less lower reports of obedience when there wasn’t signifiers

More prestigious universities have a stronger presence of authority

What does Prestige (ex. in universities) influence in terms of authority?

Depersonalized Victim

•  Separate actions from victim make it easier to do effect

  • When you see victim as actual person you tend to care more/push back

Defiant Models

If you see an individual push back against authority, you are more likely to push back against it as well

Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love

• Intimacy:

• Passion:

• Commitment:

The Theory of 3 parts of Attraction

• ______: close, connected, and bonded emotional feelings towards someone

• ______: Physical and more sexual attractions towards another individual

• ______: your desire to remain in a relationship with another individual

Matching Hypothesis

People get into relationships with other individuals who are of equal level attraction

• People with more symmetry tends to be generally viewed more as attractive

  • Why?: Association of symmetry with health

    • Like how when something is slanted, it is viewed as imperfect

How does facial symmetry affect view of Attraction?

Attitude Alignment

people tend to be more similar in their attitude, the longer they remain in a relationship

• Nuance: something like political view is more important at the beginning of a relationship than change as it progresses throughout a relationship

Proximity

Easier to see/are closer to an individual, easier for a relationship to maintain and grow

• Relational Agression

• Physical Afression

• Hostile Agression

• Intrumental Agression

Types of Agression

Relational Aggression

seeking to cause harm to someone’s relationships

• Intent matters

• Women more likely

Physical Agression

seeking to cause harm to someone’s actual body

• Intent matters 

• Men more likely

• Subconscious intent: an implicit act that one might not see as on purpose, but deep down intended on doing

Hostile Aggression

something in the environment causes reaction of aggression

• Spontaneous

Instrumental Aggression

using aggression as a tool to solve an issue

Roles

depending on the position an individual is in, someone is more or less likely to behave aggressively

• Ex: goalie’s less likely to use aggression during game

• 2 groups of college students separated into prisoners and guards

• There was mock arrests and dehumanization by giving each prisoner numbers of chains

Observation:

• Guards became more erratic/authoritative, sadistic, forcing humiliation upon prisoners

• Prisoner rebellion broke out on the second day which made the Guards see them as actual dangerous criminals

  • Led to more humiliation, and cruelty from guards

Result:

• Prisoners suffered emotional trauma, anxiety, and mental breakdowns

• Despite experiment meant to last 2 weeks, let out after 6 days from pressure of outside observers

What happened in the Stanford prison experiment?

• Lies: they lied saying that they didn’t tell the guards what to say

• Zembardo told the guards to amp up the aggressiveness

• They told prisoners that they were not allowed to leave unless it was a physical or mental health issue

• Not a scientific study but influential

What was the truth of Stanford Prison Experiment?

Altruism

Social behavior intended to help some other person or being

Kin Selection

: More likely to help those who we are biologically related to

• Holds true even if lets say you live with your cousin and your siblings

Reciprocal Altruism

 I will help you with the idea that you are going to help me

• Can be an unspoken expectation → social acceptance

• More likely to be ostracized if you take more than you give

Empathy-Altruism Hypothesis

Empathy is required in order to see any Altruistic motivation in helping someone else

Darley & Batson, 1973

Priest and Altruism Experiment

• Went to a seminary (priest school)

• Expectation: students will have strong moral compass and connection to religion

• Presented a speech regarding helping someone else

  •  (thought to would have helped but didnt)

• Three variables of students

  • Some late

  • Some early

  • Some on time

• Present them an individual who had fallen on their path and see if they would help

• Result: Those who were late were more likely to not help and step over helpless man 

  • Our willingness to help depends on the inconvenience that it affects on us

What happened in Darley & Batson, 1973?

Bystander Effect

More likely to receive help when there are fewer people around

She was stalked, stabbed, and killed outside of her apartment and after the murder, it was found that there was 38 people who had witnessed and heard the attack but did nothing

• Inspired scientific study of bystander effect

What happened to Kitty Genovese?

Diffusion responsibility

Tends to push responsibility onto someone else especially when there is more people around

Social responsiblity norm

 more likely to help people who we perceive as more vulnerable

Cognitive Miser

our brains are lazy; we like to save cognitive resources → often leaves us to not thinking things through

• Leads to cognitive biases/errors

• Getting things wrong, but you feel more satisfied with your life as it stands

Inductive reasoning

drawing general conclusions from specific evidence

Deductive reasoning:

general statements used to draw/build specific conclusions

• Ex: Socrates said “All men are mortal” → socrates is a man so he is mortal

Syntax vs. grammar

_____: rules for how we are putting words together to create meaning

• Specifically meaning

_____: general rules that surround a specific language

• Case study of a young girl who was abused by her family

  • Previous before this study, people believed language is a critical period

    • Aka, cannot develop after said period

  • After her case study, it was turned into sensitive period 

    • She was still able to use and learn language 

What happened with Genie?

• what did we learn

Homesign

phenomenon at looking at deaf children born into a hearing household

• What ends up happening is that children start to learn their own form of sign language in the household

Symbolic, Generative, Structured

Rules of Language? (3)

Symbolic

Generative

Structured

• _____: ideas that sounds or words or pictures can represent abstract concepts

• _____: small number of symbols, sounds, pictures, words, can create infinite words/messages

  • We are able to create slang/terms in a societal context

• _____: each language has its own rules that allow for the communication of ideas between members of that shared language

Semantics

looking at meaning of words

• denotation & connotation

Denotation vs. Connotation

• _____: dictionary definition of what a word is

  • Useful for learning (syntax component)

• _____: specific interpretation of a word based on culture and identity of the speaker and the receiver

Phonemes

 smallest unit of speech, sounds that make up a given language

• Infants are better at distinguishing 

Morphemes

smallest unit of meaning

• Include prefixes, suffixes and root words

  • Ex: _____(s), s is a plural

Receptive Vocabulary vs. Productive Vocabulary:

• _____: The words we can understand

• _____: the words we can use and produce

Telegraphic speech

 Subject + verb = creating meaning

• Earliest understandable speech by children

Overextension

 We are using a word in more instances that we should

• Babies understanding spoons and starts calling forks spoons

Under-extension

 Using a word more conservatively

• Babies calling their favorite spoon a spoon but everything else something different

Overregularization

take a common grammar rule and apply it in an irregular manner

• Ex: Mouse → Mouses (meant to be mice)

Field Dependence

taking into effect the context of the situation when you are thinking about something 

• Eastern cultures more prevalent

Field Independence

Focusing on the object and ignoring the context

• Western cultures more prevalent

Irrelevant information

Distracted by irrelevant information included in a question which leads you to the wrong conclusion